Download Dubravka Stojanović

Dubravka Stojanović
Iskušavanje načela
Srpska socijaldemokratska partija i ratni ciljevi Srbije 1912-1918
Tempations of Principles
Serbian social-Democratic Party and Serbian War Aims 1912-1918
TIMIT Book, Beograd 1994
SUMMARY
The Serbian Social Democratic Party was founded after the overthrow of the dynasty on July 20,
1903. The Party's ideological sources could be traced back to the works of Svetozar Markoviw
(1846-1875.) to whose national ethnic issues it remaind attached until the end of its existence in
1919. The basis of the Party's national policy was: national and social liberation resolving ethnic
issues through revolution and not war; the creation of the federal state as the optimal solution of
the Serbian national issue. These principles remaind constantly present in the attitude of the
Serbian Left towards the national issue.
The war period 1912-1918. brought about a great deal of trial. The policy of the Balkan alliance
conducted by the Serbian Government just before the First Balkan War could have been close to
Serbian Socialistes. Just like their Government, they believed that there was no real progress on
the Balkan unless the subdued peoples liberated themselves from the Turkish domination. Even
the metod of associating Balkan countries in their fight against the Turks was similar. That is
why the two Party leaders Triqa Kacleroviw, the M.P. and Duqan Popoviw, the editor-in-chief of
the Party newspaper accepted the state policy of the Balkan alliance as well as the participation
of Serbia in the First Balkan war which appeared to be the only way for the subdued peoples to
liberate themselves from the Turkish power. The sensitive question of the national issue paved
the way for conflicts in the Party.
The remaining leadersship headed by Dimitrije Tucoviw and Dragiqa Lap~eviw, acted according
to their original principles. Although the First Balkan War was generaly considered as final
fulfillment of the oath of Kosovo and liberation of the Serbian medieval state territories after five
centuries, socialists publicly expressed their anti-war attitude. They did that in Parliament, at
public meetings and through the Party newspaper. The conduct of the Party revealed its ideology,
its obligations towards the Second International to which it belonged, as well as some real
political attitudes which the writers of Serbian history have never made point of. The Allies' war
against Turkey meant introducing boundaries among the Balkan countries, particularly in the
nationally non-differentiated Macedonia. The essence of the Party attitude was the belief that
placing boundaries on the ethnicaly mixed Balkans would lead to new wars or as they put it
"adding yeast to new conflicts". Expressing the idea of the Balkan Federation, Serbian socialistst
opposed any war between Balkan neighbours.
The Second Balkan War which broke out between former allies in August 1913, the Serbian
attempt to occupy Northern Albania, and the political system that was introduced in recently
annexed territories, offered strong arguments to socialists in pursuing their policy. The war with
Bulgaria showed that no boundaries placed in Macedonia would satisfy any of the interested
parties and their precise anticipation of events was proved during the First and the Second World
Wars. The Serbian Governmant's effort to ensure the country's access to the Adriatic sea over
Northern Albania was often used as an exammple of dwarish Balkan imperialism that in no way
differed from its West European model. According to Serbian socialists the attitude of authorities
towards other peoples' freedom was the best index of its attitude towards its own people's
freedom. The Party's attitude towards these issues restored unity among its leaders.
After the outbreak of the First World War the Serbian Social Democratic Party was the only
member of the International that voted against military credits in its own national Parliament for
which it was highly praised by the Serbian socialist history later on. These non-historic praises
covered up the essence of the problem and led the researchers away from their basic task. The
question is: why did a weak Serbian party, at the moment when the country was attacked, even
biologically endangered, vote against military credits and risk its own isolation on the plitical
scene. The Serbian socialists could not have suposed that this question would lead to the
disintegration of the Second International and that, beyond any expectation, the Social
Democratic Parties would vote for war in their respective national parliaments thus declaring
their duty in the defence of their own countries. Why did Serbian socialists not vote for the
defence of their own country? Why was their responsability towards the International greater
than the one they had to their own assaulted country.
The answer ofered by historical sources has a number of layers. This book tries to give an
explanation of the question of political pragmatism which was one of the motives completely
supressed by the Serbian history. Historical facts give the impression that the socialists were
politicians who though about the long-term consequences of their actions, and built in their
statements a great deal of political calculations that after the war, the impoverished, crippled and
starving people, would remember the anti-war words of Social democrats and have confidence in
their politics. "If the people at large misled by momentary reactions and chauvinistic mood hated
us during the war, they will have more love and respect for us now." Similar statements given by
the Serbian socialists shows them as politically realistic people with built in "pragmatism in the
long run". This annuls the cherished picture of them as uncompromising idealists who left the
impression of acting as a religious sect following its own rules.
The first proofs of the acceptance of the idea of Yugoslavia by the Serbian Socal Democrats
could be found in January 1915, which did not exclude the possitbility of its existance even
before, but its traces were lost during the war. The Social Democrats had a similar attitude
towards Yugoslavia to the one they had towards the Balkan Federation. They did not go into
details of state affairs or a constitutional system. It was the principle that mattered. In both ideas,
Balkan as well as Yugoslav, integration was the basic principle that could enable modern
economic developement, cultural overlapping and state democracy. Any other solution would
lead to chronic tension on the whole of the Balkan territory and make natural economic relations
and the creation of politically balanced states impossible thus enabling the strenghtening of
autoritarian systems and the influence of military circles. That is why the Yugoslav idea was
acceptable for them as they experienced it as the first phase of an overall Balkan integration.
The analysis shows that the socialists were representatives of political modernism in Serbia of
that time. They gave priority to economic development, the improvement of taffic, industry, the
school system, tax system, agriculture... which fitted them into the great movement of European
political thought of the time.
The orthodoxy of their politcal expression as well as the autoritarian hierarchy in the party itself
represent a special paradox. How could the modernism of their thought be explained and
reconcited with their doctrinal actions. A possible answer could be that the socialists emerged as
a natural reaction to the leading and the ruling in the developing Serbian Society. They jump out
of the rapid train of Serbian modernization as its correction. They are the historical antithesis of
Serbian development.
Being the product of the Serbian Society they share its limitations. The peasant country in which
they acted reduced their modern approach to orthodox expression. Insisting on "strictly separated
front" they gradually replaced profundity and authenticity of their thought with narrow poltical
expression which beccame ossified in its own dynamism. Having become an aim of its own,
their political bearing became radical, covering its weakness with too high demands.
The fundamental reason which caused the domination of political over economic concepts lies in
the underdevelopment of Serbia where as in all other insufficiently developed societies a specific
recognizable kind of the Left emerged in which ideology and politics have priority and the
personality of the leader is of decisive importance. The revolutionary concept, relying on the new
circumstances that originated from the victorious revolution in Russia, prevailed in the Party.
That was a victory of revolutionary continuity and the tradition of Serbian Social Democracy but
also a responsable to the social situation in Serbia of that time.